The conduct issue aside, the other question of how Linux survives without Linus is certainly important.

Over the years, he has set up a highly hierarchical power structure based on trust and loyalty with him at the top. Sort of dictatorial. That is not necessarily a bad thing as long as he manages it with the right goals in mind, and he seems to have done that fairly well.
(It was often said the best leadership is a benevolent monarchy.)
I think this speaks to strong focused goals and the ability to exclude trying to manage things that are not part of his focus. This would include trying to manage culture as part of the development community. He said as much in his letter. When the single leader tries to manage culture, it will invariably go wrong somewhere.There are too many opinions and to much incompatibility to succeed in this alone. Some amount of exclusion is almost inevitable. But avoiding managing it can also lead to some level of chaos and the culture we see now.

Going forward, we probably should consider two paths for Linux development without Linus.
The first is to maintain the hierarchical structure by putting someone else in that place. It could work for a while, if you can find someone who is properly focused like Linus was. If you find someone focused on software first and culture second (or not at all) you probably will end up with a quality OS and similar environment. If you end up with someone who is not quite as well focused as Linus and who does end up trying to manage culture, then it is highly likely the quality of the software will go down.

The other option is to change the leadership structure completely to something more community based and/or democratic. This could be able to handle both software quality and culture, but will very likely lower efficiency. Many distributions have done this with varying degrees of success.

Managing culture is hard enough under any circumstances. There will always be differences in opinion, incompatibility and preferences, and usually some conflict about what the priorities should be. If there is a single leader, then there will be a single point for focusing conflict. If there is a broader community and some democracy, then at least the blame for certain priorities can be spread out and excused with "majority rules". It is more about defusing incompatibility than curing it. A single person simply cannot do that by the design of the hierarchy, even if they have the support of the majority. And we don't really know if Linus had that.

We're talking about humans here, so ... The Expanse.

>Do you believe rehabilitation is impossible or do you want revenge?

I don't believe that someone who commits mass murder can be rehabilitated, no. It isn't about revenge; it's about public safety.

Someone once pointed out that hoping a rapist gets raped in prison isn't a victory for his victim(s), because it somehow gives him what he had coming to him, but it's actually a victory for rape and violence. I wish I could remember who said that, because they are right. The score doesn't go Rapist: 1 World: 1. It goes Rape: 2.

What this man did is unspeakable, and he absolutely deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he needs to be kept away from other prisoners as a safety issue, there are ways to do that without keeping him in solitary confinement, which has been shown conclusively to be profoundly cruel and harmful.

Putting him in solitary confinement, as a punitive measure, is not a victory for the good people in the world. It's a victory for inhumane treatment of human beings. This ruling is, in my opinion, very good and very strong for human rights, *precisely* because it was brought by such a despicable and horrible person. It affirms that all of us have basic human rights, even the absolute worst of us on this planet.

This is precisely why I lost all interest in Oculus the instant I heard that it had been acquired by Facebook.

I've gone through this. Here's how you do it.

Start gathering a few popular science books on subjects directly on and also near to your goal. Some people reject popular science books as too light weight, but it does have value. This exposes you to the variety of subjects in and around your interest. You might not have been aware of some aspects of your topic and you are introduced to them here without too much effort. You also learn to associate detailed technical topics to the wider areas where they are used.

Read the whole book. Books are better than random google searches and videos because they will guide you into areas you might not have considered relevant. Broadening your base knowledge will allow you to make a more informed decision about your favorite topics. Once you have a broader and more informed understanding of the topics and areas involved, you are better able to identify your interests, or even switch interests.

That is when you start going into a more detailed dive into your target topic. Follow through and read the whole thing. Again, pick one or more text books or deeper science books. The purpose again is to guide you into areas you might not have considered before.

This time, you will hit lots of technical subjects that you might not know. That is when you go searching for online information, wikipedia, online course videos, Youtube content or other textbooks. For these, you will only need to cover enough to support your primary interest, and you will have a fairly good idea how much that is.

You are not going to go professional with this, but it will be more than enough to keep your interest up and curiosity satisfied.

Are the pulses from pulsars visible from all directions, or just from the plane of rotation? If you move far enough, will some disappear and others appear?

I may be a bit OCD about passwords and security - 30 years USAF and NASA have bent my brain a bit. Typing in pwds a lot doesn't bug me cuz I know my pwd mgt tool is safe because it's out of reach of hackers.

It's called pencil and paper. I have a notebook, and all pwds are encoded there. I have 4 simple rules for modifying what I write into what I type in. An example rule you could use is "Real pwds use only even digits; Passwords are written with all ten digits, odd digits are ignored". 2-4 simple rules will make it unhackable even for someone with physical control of passbook. (Never write down the rules - keep them in yer head).
To keep the rules fresh, use different passwords and uids for every single app or website possible. You'll always be rehearsing the rules in yer head, you won't forget them.
Here's an example from my current set: pwd= "RhinoPott=amus" Rule 1,3
I'll bet you can't guess the real password in 10,000 tries. You don't know rules 1 or 3, which modify what's written. Go ahead, give me 10000 tries in a text file - I'll let you know if you get it.
This really really works - I've been doing this way since the 1980's, and haven't misplaced a properly coded pwd yet.

No really, what is this post about? I use noscript, and a (mostly) empty page comes up from your link. I obviously won't enable it if it is 'bugged' or might compromise my privacy or security. So explain what the bug actually is. This is a website about information, not reddit-style "oooh look what I found, go see it now!". Sorry - that was harsher than I mean it to be, but it communicates the idea.

The cop's job is to get people in trouble. In a perfect world, it's the people that deserve trouble that get it, but even then, the very best you can hope to get from the police is to be left alone. There's no need to characterize cops as bullies or incompentent - even the good cops have to look at citizens as potential targets. The course of action when the cops want to talk to you is immediately get legal counsel, then follow that counsel in dealing with the police.
As for us v them - police are no longer part of the communities they patrol. They only see the worst in the community, and that biases their perspective. Also, they are trained and equipped more as an invading army than as "public servants", so seeing them as the enemy is an obvious and natural result.

is that a person's opinion is somehow relevant to how they perform professionally. Just disagreeing with your employer is never just cause for firing the employee - the alternative is a cadre of 'yesmen' who cause stagnation through lack of new perspective and ideas. An employer who refuses to accept any kind of dissent is one who dooms his organization to mediocrity.

Swiggle D. Leggboan. Go ahead, look me up. I don't know the direct-to-profile link, sorry no clickie-poppie.

The plan was to move more slowly, using airplane-like vehicles to get into orbit. Ultimatley, the moon was the goal. JFK's challenge derailed the early shuttle program in the late 1950s-early 1960s. Use of 'disintegrating totem poles' replaced the development of reusable spacecraft parts. The shuttle program that we got after Apollo was another quick-easy-expensive program, rather than the result of 20+ years of development. sorry no cites, but I have little time right now for this....mebbe later. (google should find bunches - look up project dynasoar, X-15, etc)